Request for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingin hovioikeus (Finland) lodged on 21 December 2018 — A and Others v Finnair Oyj

(Case C-832/18)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Helsingin hovioikeus

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: A and Others

Defendant: Finnair Oyj

Questions referred

Is Regulation No 261/2004 1 to be interpreted as meaning that a passenger has the right to further compensation in accordance with Article 7(1) if he has received compensation for a cancelled flight, the operating air carrier of the re-routed flight is the same as that of the cancelled flight, and the re-routed flight after the cancelled flight is also delayed beyond the scheduled time of arrival to such an extent that it entitles the passenger to compensation?

If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative, can the operating air carrier rely on extraordinary circumstances within the meaning of Article 5(3) if, following a technical follow-up by the aircraft manufacturer in relation to aircraft already in use, the part dealt with in that document is in fact treated as a so-called ‘on condition’ part, that is to say as a part that is used until it becomes defective, and the operating air carrier has prepared to replace the part in question by permanently stocking a spare part?

____________

1 Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).